So my buddy is playing in a new game and gets into a disagreement with the DM after the session. This DM swears that fighters suck in pathfinder and that rogues and monks are way better at dealing damage. Fast forward to the end of the discussion, the DM throws down a challenge.

Level 20 Fighter in a 1 on 1 fight versus a monk or a rogue. 20 point buy, Core book only....

And no magic items. (The DM claimed "they would all come out in the wash") Under those conditions, who do you think is better?

Fighter. It isn't even a question. The only way he is going to lose is if he fails a Fortitude save against Master Strike or Quivering Palm. Given his good Fortitude save to start, and plenty of feats for Improved Great Fortitude, he would have to get insanely unlucky for that to happen.

Not enough information to answer. I can imagine a situation where a grapple-focused monk sneaks up on a bow-using fighter using Stealth. But I can more easily imagine a dumb melee monk who stands around letting a fighter with a big sword chop him to pieces.

(By the way, note that "no magic items" is a bit of an advantage to a level 20 monk that has DR 10/chaotic.)

Hahaha, that was my consensus with my buddy as well. With only the Core book available, my buddy ran out of things to take with his fighter and ended up taking everything he could involving archery and two handed fighting, he ended up at something like +25/25/20/15/10- with many/rapid shot with a masterwork longbow for 1d8+26. Or swing a falchion at +26/21/16/11 for 2d4+32 ish (don't have the numbers in front of me).

Either way, with no magic items to boost AC that should shred a rogue or monk pretty damn fast.

Hogarth, no it's not. The fighter has a feat to completely ignore that DR 10.

No magic items hurts monk the most, because with them, monk could at least try a one trick pony build of ghost touch weapon + empty body to basically wreck a completely unprepared fighter. Even that would fail if the Fighter bothered to make his weapon ghost touch, though.

No magic means that there are going to be fewer missed attacks than normal... making damage output vs hit points likely the primary factors. This would seem like an ideal place for sneak attack to shine, but in a 1 on 1 setup the rogue isn't likely to be getting many sneak attacks.

Switch it to 2 on 2 and I could see a pair of well built rogues pulling it off. Otherwise, nope... not gonna happen by core rules.

i learned recently that ray of enfeeblement applys sneak attack strength damage. if thats true then a rogue could knock a fighters str down to a 1 for 20 rounds then greater feint the fighter to death.

So my buddy is playing in a new game and gets into a disagreement with the DM after the session. This DM swears that fighters suck in pathfinder and that rogues and monks are way better at dealing damage. Fast forward to the end of the discussion, the DM throws down a challenge.

Level 20 Fighter in a 1 on 1 fight versus a monk or a rogue. 20 point buy, Core book only....

And no magic items. (The DM claimed "they would all come out in the wash") Under those conditions, who do you think is better?

No magic items. My money is on the fighter even more.
Unless he rolls a nat 1 he should be hitting every time.
I would go archer, and take a two handed weapon as back. I would also take improved unarmed strike just in case I got disarmed.

Wash off the stink of troll, let's make the discussion interesting. How long could a 20 Level Fighter last vs. a 20 Level Rogue and his Monk cohort? Both PCs have WBL/2 and can't spend more than a 1/4 wealth on any one item.

What say you?

/ at first glance, I'd predict that quantity will probably beat quality.

Not enough information to answer. I can imagine a situation where a grapple-focused monk sneaks up on a bow-using fighter using Stealth. But I can more easily imagine a dumb melee monk who stands around letting a fighter with a big sword chop him to pieces.

(By the way, note that "no magic items" is a bit of an advantage to a level 20 monk that has DR 10/chaotic.)

Good point. I do realize that the lack of items is to the advantage of a monk/rogue because their to hit is worse, but other than DR I'm not seeing how a monk can keep up. Yeah he's getting a lot of attacks, with solid base damage, but still... haven't crunched any numebrs for them

So my buddy is playing in a new game and gets into a disagreement with the DM after the session. This DM swears that fighters suck in pathfinder and that rogues and monks are way better at dealing damage. Fast forward to the end of the discussion, the DM throws down a challenge.

Level 20 Fighter in a 1 on 1 fight versus a monk or a rogue. 20 point buy, Core book only....

And no magic items. (The DM claimed "they would all come out in the wash") Under those conditions, who do you think is better?

Well, basically it would be fighter, fighter and then fighter.

Sword and board fighter would have better AC than either monk or rogue, better hit points, and dish better damage. Essentially, he hits with +6 to hit and +8 damage with high threat ranges.

Monk doesn't have much of a prayer. His 2d10 from unarmed strike looks good, but the fighter hits as often as him, more accurately, and for a higher average damage. I guess a spring-attacking monk might be able to stay out of charge range once or twice, but in the end he will have less AC, less hit points and deliver fewer hits.

Wash off the stink of troll, let's make the discussion interesting. How long could a 20 Level Fighter last vs. a 20 Level Rogue and his Monk cohort? Both PCs have WBL/2 and can't spend more than a 1/4 wealth on any one item.

What say you?

/ at first glance, I'd predict that quantity will probably beat quality.

I wish I was trolling, I really do. This DM is basing a fighter's ability to do damage off of a 11th level dwarf fighter that uses a shield and axe and does 1d8 +11 per hit. He aparently thinks that all fighters are that effective.

Also, my money would be on the 2 vs 1, especially if the monk/rogue are built to disarm/lock down the fighter.

Wash off the stink of troll, let's make the discussion interesting. How long could a 20 Level Fighter last vs. a 20 Level Rogue and his Monk cohort? Both PCs have WBL/2 and can't spend more than a 1/4 wealth on any one item.

What say you?

/ at first glance, I'd predict that quantity will probably beat quality.

I wish I was trolling, I really do. This DM is basing a fighter's ability to do damage off of a 11th level dwarf fighter that uses a shield and axe and does 1d8 +11 per hit. He aparently thinks that all fighters are that effective.

Also, my money would be on the 2 vs 1, especially if the monk/rogue are built to disarm/lock down the fighter.

Killing the rogue first would be the smart thing to do. I think he can finish the monk even if he only has half of his hit points left.

I tried to build a level 20 fighter archer, but lost the post...grumble.. Did make me realize how crappy CMD would be w/ no magic items. While fighter archer would absolutely destroy them, if you felt like being different, you could probably also mess them up with a tripper build. Or be really mean and out grapple the monk to death...

Good point. I do realize that the lack of items is to the advantage of a monk/rogue because their to hit is worse, but other than DR I'm not seeing how a monk can keep up.

By cheating and doing clever things that aren't very "monk-y".

I used to participate in the "Core Coliseum" forum on the Wizards of the Coast message boards, and I saw lots of clever tricks that are well within the grasp of a monk. Like using tower shields (not as good in PFRPG, sadly), tanglefoot bags, bolas, sundering, disarming, grappling, tripping, sniping, sneaking, climbing, swimming, etc.

Now a clever tactician could probably counteract all of those (e.g. use only adamantine weapons to make sundering difficult, use locked gauntlets to make disarming difficult, take various anti-grapple measures, etc.). But a naive guy who just thinks "I have a bow, so I win" and is hardly invulnerable.

@ Sidekick
Not really Greater Feint is still a move action, which leave the rogue with a standard action(one attack)

The fighter then gets a full attack in.

If you are implying that the sneak attack applies to the ray of enfeeblement spell that does not work either. Sneak attacks do damage(hit point damage), and that spell only applies strenght penalties so even if ability damage were possible with sneak attack it still would not work.

Not really Greater Feint is still a move action, which leave the rogue with a standard action(one attack)

The fighter then gets a full attack in.

If you are implying that the sneak attack applies to the ray of enfeeblement spell that does not work either. Sneak attacks do damage(hit point damage), and that spell only applies strenght penalties so even if ability damage were possible with sneak attack it still would not work.

That was exactly the thought I had. Even with a full sneak attack, the fighter could just soak the damage and then turn around and do easily over 100 damage on that full attack.

Fighters gonna win hands down versus monk. Give him a 2 handed weapon and power attack and if the monk sacrifices AC for damage you'll still beat him with power attack, and if he doesn't he does no damage. Oh and as for combat Maneuvers fighters gonna either have

Rogue's gonna lose because he'll hardly ever get sneak attack off. Like people have said he could probably feint but that will only net him 1 attack which will still on average do less than a fighter with power attack.

Oh and as forthe monk doing things not monkish, the monk will have a lower cmb than the fighter but approx the same cmd. So in a battle of combat maneuvers te fighter will end up winning

He can. The monk & rogue combo's best chance is to use maneuvers and the Crane Style feat chain for the monk to minimise damage while they try and trip/disarm the fighter. If they get lucky, they might pull it off.

He can. The monk & rogue combo's best chance is to use maneuvers and the Crane Style feat chain for the monk to minimise damage while they try and trip/disarm the fighter. If they get lucky, they might pull it off.

That's the hilarious thing about the arbitrary challenge. It was only using the Core Book. So no styles, no archetypes, no extra stuff. Kind of hilarious.

That being said, for to real 20 level fight... not sure. Denial by a the monk could really slow down the fighter's effectiveness., snatch arrows, crane, that sort of thing.

The fighter definitely wants to go melee and not ranged as the monk can Deflect Arrows the Manyshot, killing that damage very quickly.

So go melee with a scimitar or something, so even if monk grabs you, you can just full attack him back. And since you are the fighter, chances are you can break the grab/pin pretty easily. The monk would not be able to Flurry of Blows you as he started the grapple, so you should be good.

Take the full weapon focus tree, take like 3 of the critical feats, take Quick Draw for sure. Take Spring Attack in this case, since you know exactly what your opponent is going to be. Dump the bejesus out of your CHA, INT, and even WIS and jack up all of your physical stats. Carry like 5 scimitars. Buy locked gauntlet so you can't be disarmed as easily. If he does disarm you, use scimitar #2, and full attack him. You should get at least 1 crit every full attack (scary isn't it?), and then we'll have a dead monk.

20th level monk can spring attack the fighter to death if no magic weapons (base movement is 90 ft) and would catch the first ranged attack.

Ready an action, the fighter do not have to chase the monk. I f he then uses ranged weapons then the fighter use a bow, even if the monk evades the frist two arrow the others should do good damage.

Ready an action to do what? Bow without magic will do what against 10/DR that can self heal? Get in trouble, I turn ethereal or dimension door away and heal.

Even if the monk only has a 13 wisdom, quivering palm is going to be a DC 23 save against a +12 bonus. If you cheese wisdom, it is even worse (and your AC is even higher...) and since I can burn ki, if it doesn't work my AC is going to be another +4 higher, in addition to the natural +5, in addition to the bonus from Wisdom.

And this isn't even digging into Quiggong stuff.

Like I said, this scenario means nothing, but the monk wins if no magic items are involved.